On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 02:47:40PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > And I think it's a good thing that not all buildds use lvm chroots > so that we actually find problems we might not see otherwise, or > maybe much later. Sadly, I have to differ on this one. I'd rather appreciate a coherent, identical setup everywhere where it's possible. Either fail everywhere due to that issue or nowhere. Having setup differences that boil down to "this buildd of that arch behaves differently than the others" or "I guess this is arch-specific because it only happens there" (while it's just due to the setup), does not help IMO. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't fail on obvious bugs in a package. I'm just not sure if we should allow bystanding packages that happen to be pulled in somewhere (and not being uninstalled/purged) to screw up the build process *in a non-deterministic way*. Kind regards, Philipp Kern -- .''`. Philipp Kern Debian Developer : :' : http://philkern.de Stable Release Manager `. `' xmpp:phil@0x539.de Wanna-Build Admin `- finger pkern/key@db.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature